When There's Nothing Better To Do . . .

The Air Force Academy is now starting to recover from a long string of bad scandals. A few years back, cadets were automatically associated as rapists who are out to get the general public. This prompted a massive shift in Department of Defense policy for the better that addressed the issue head on and put USAFA at the forefront of tackling sexual assault at the university level. The policy made sure not only to educate cadets about the horrors of sexual assault, but also to facilitate an atmosphere which made it more comfortable for victims to come forward and confidentially report their cases. I bring this up because of the truly outstanding work Academy leadership did in order to combat the problem.

A similar story can be told about alcohol incidents. As everything from DUIs to underage drinking started becoming a real problem at the Academy, the leadership proposed harsher punishments and rehabilitation plans that have proven to be effective to severely reduce the number of incidents today.

But with serious issues like sexual assault and alcohol starting to be under control, what does this leave the current generation of Academy leadership left to take on? Nothing, really. But every permanent party staffer only has three to four years at the Academy to make a difference and gain more bullets for their performance reports, so what happens? They take a previously ignored issue and try to put it back in the spotlight. They create more unneeded policies, write more rules for the sight picture, and attempt to sell their ideas to other members of the permanent party staff to get credit for making major changes at USAFA. It can be anything from "cracking down on spirit missions" to "enforcing uniform standards" to "making sure cadets are doing their hospital corners right on their beds." The logic associated with such petty things can usually be justified by bringing up that cadets aren't generally performing as they should be, and that the entire Wing has been slipping in standards lately. The obvious solution to fixing these problems is to clamp down on the rules temporarily in the hopes that one day those rules will not be necessary.

My favorite example by far of this phenomenon is the doors open policy. If we look at how it got started in the first place, it goes back about two years ago when a certain Group AOC went around on Saturday and was apalled by the way cadets kept their rooms. Did I mention it was a Saturday? Anyway, this certain individual led a crusade to first implement on the group level a doors open policy every morning to make sure cadets are cleaning their rooms. The principle it worked on was that if your fellow cadets walk by your room and it is a disaster, the humiliation suffered by that would force you to keep tidy quarters. While this argument never gained much support amongst cadets, when a different spin was put on it it appeared to get more traction. The new argument said that having doors open fosters an environment where cadets are more likely to meet each other and interact with one another, which therefore brings the squadron closer and things are accomplished better. If on my way back from class I see a lonely squadronmate sitting there by their lonesome I am more likely to come in and strike up a conversation with them. Makes sense? Maybe, but the catch was when all of the final details were being worked out of the policy it was usually a topic to discuss during a cadet Squadron Commander interview. Since there is a small level of military justification associated with this policy, any cadet who showed opposition to it was sure not to be put into a high level job because they "really didn't understand what makes good officers."

I can't say I necessarily blame the permanent party for trying to leave whatever mark they can on USAFA; they've got their careers to worry about and families back home. But it seems more often than not they care more about making it look like they're doing something at work rather than what would be best for cadets.